ABSTRACT
The question of whether the removal of part of a building constituted demolition or alteration of a listed building was the issue in Shimizu (UK) Ltd v Westminster City Council [1997] JPL 523; (1994) EGCS 205. The distinction between demolition and alteration was of fundamental importance in deciding whether compensation was payable under the then extant s 27(2) Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act (LBA) 1990, which was subsequently repealed by the Planning and Compensation Act 1991 (Sched 19, Part II). The significance of the decision of the House of Lords is that it determined that the whole building is to be treated as a listed building and, therefore, the removal of part of a building does not constitute demolition but rather alteration, unless the work is so extensive as to amount to the clearing of the whole site.
